This is why all good ranges are laid out right on an East West line......... ;-)
Artillery, sure. Coriolis effect on a rifle? That morning cup of coffee has way more influence than the earth’s rotation.
I look forward to an article about compensating for relativistic effects when using high-velocity ammo.
That’s why they never noticed this problem during the civil war, because it was north/south.
But we will need to take this into account when CA secedes. Once the commies are all in one place we should take the initiative to wipe them out.
For myself, I avoid the coriolis problem by using artillery for people more than 1000 yds away.
For later.
L
I'm sorry, but if you're shooting at a buck at over 1,000 yards, you're nobody's idea of a sportsman, and a poor excuse for a hunter.
The winds aloft had a greater effect on our artillery fires, but we had a calculation we made to consider all those variables. Later, computers made our job easier.
Interesting that they don’t actually _calculate_ what the effect should be, just fire a few rounds in different directions and casually attribute the difference in results.
Instructors at the long-range course I took (Storm Mountain) addressed the Coriolis Effect by saying “ignore it, doesn’t matter at these ranges” (around 1000m, roughly upper end of .308 uses).
Too bad he misuses the term ‘Coriolis Effect’ ...
I don’t have the math chops anymore but I would like to see the actual calculation for 1000 yards and less than 2 second flight time.
What about solar storms and cosmic rays?
They must be taken into consideration, as well...............
The Earth moved. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
lol. could this be why I kept missing the target at 50 yards?
I believe Elmer Keith or Jack O’Connor mentioned something like this causing bulls eye misses at long ranges. I did not know what he was talking about. I can barely see 100 yards with glasses!
The idea that Coriolis effect happens because the target is advancing or retreating on the horizon is absurd. That might explain what a shooter sees but there is no (Newtonian) physics to support it.
The vertical component of Coriolis effect stems from the fact that the rotation of the earth contributes just a tad of KE to any bullet launched in the same direction as the planet is rotating in, and subtracts just a little KE if fired against the direction of rotation. The slight difference in KE also means a slight difference of velocity at the muzzle, which means a slight difference in the time a bullet needs to cover a given distance. And bullet drop is a function of time of flight (32 feet/sec^2). So the bullet fired to the east will exhibit less drop than one fired to the west. Which is precisely why NASA fires all its rockets to the east. Why pass up a little free energy?
But that’s only the vertical component. Coriolis also has a horizontal component, which is totally dependent on the shooter’s latitude, completely INDEPENDENT of both the vertical component AND the azimuth of fire, and the change reverses direction depending whether you’re in the northern hemisphere or southern. All of which flies in the face of the article’s dumbed-down (and totally fallacious) explanation. Which probably is why he doesn’t bring up the topic of the horizontal component.
Too bad the guys who invented the Internet didn’t think to limit posting to people who’d passed a literacy test.